There is no "problem". :roll: Whatever else is real, the physical is that aspect of the real – iceberg above the (fundamental?) waterline – available to physical modeling (i.e. natural explanations of material data). Whatever else is real – always saught in scientific inquiry and research – does not play any role in the physical sciences or factual experience that's testably known so far. Epistemology is exhausted, exceeded, by ontology – methodological (N OT Wayfarer's strawman "nothing but" metaphysical) materialism - physicalism - naturalism.However, the problem, if it's one ... — TheMadFool
YOU ARE STILL PEDDLING THIS easily repeatedly debunked pseudo-scientific "observer effect" woo-of-the-gaps interpretation as if it is QM itself? :rofl: :sweat: :smirk: :yawn: :yikes:The reason quantum physics tends to undermine materialism in any form, has nothing to do with the equivalence of matter and energy. It has to do with the observer problem/measurement problem. It is because quantum physics failed to find an ultimate material point-particle, and also because it undermined the idea that the object (read Universe) exists totally independently of the act of observation. — Wayfarer
It would be like a person who spends faer entire life in, say, Paris and forms the belief that Paris = The universe. — TheMadFool
What does materialism have to do with space? — TheMadFool
Science aspires to see the world ‘as it truly is’, absent of and and all observers. But it can’t do that, because even the units of measurement that science uses are fixed in terms of the human perspective. — Wayfarer
have you ever met a Parisian? — Tom Storm
Aaah! Paris! [...] I think you'll find the view over here rather spectacular — Mr. Hyde
Ask any person, any person at all, and real = physical. — TheMadFool
we are even trapped in the physical world, because we have to use physical means to do things. Even as I communicate on this site, I am reliant on my phone and my fingers. I remember the time when I had a broken wrist, and it was the right one, I spent 6 weeks struggling to do most things because we rely on physical reality, and our bodies. — Jack Cummins
Not me. I've never believed it, and never said it. — Wayfarer
If I were a nonphysicalist, I would say, "this is exactly what I'm talking about. The so-called physical world can't be ignored unless you want to end up in a hospital or worse, a grave. However, this doesn't constitute an argument. At best it's a scare tactic — TheMadFool
It's actually a pretty good argument... hard to ignore facts like that. — Tom Storm
My guess is they come from the same "place" other thoughts, words, walking, etc come from: 'subpersonal brain processes' (i.e. system 1 "fast brain" ~ Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow), in other words, from the you that's deeper than You. Sorry, no Platonic out-there, transcendent, supersensible, collective unconscious woo-woo beaming ideas into our "souls" like a radio receiver that "creative" people platonicly "recollect" by turning some tuner knob in their "soul" to another frequency. Our brains are brain-blind because they lack internal sensory organs and so we do not directly perceive that we even have brains that generate 'the idea of having a brain-blind brain'.One major query which I have is where do creative ideas come from? — Jack Cummins
However, I think that the point which you make about the role of the observer, which is recognised in the physics of relativity is extremely important, and I do wonder to what extent this ideas has been incorporated as a basis, or aspect, of the underlying premises of philosophy. — Jack Cummins
The role of the observer may be important, but only for the observer. — Kenosha Kid
As for mystery, I am not sure to what extent it can be ruled out or incorporated. — Jack Cummins
:up:The role of the observer may be important, but only for the observer. — Kenosha Kid
We’re all observers, and the absence of human beings, what observers are there? Now that’s a question you’re not going to find the answer for in physics. — Wayfarer
Unsure of the relevance of this though. — Kenosha Kid
As Wayfarer pointed out there is no mind independent observation, and all minds operate through a paradigm, which is biased towards that paradigm. It means there can be no reality, as envisaged by naive realists. What there is instead is interpretations of reality. It means nobody's interpretation of reality can have absolute authority. In reality there is no reality! :lol: — Pop
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.